Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enforcement of a Global Code of Conduct on TNC’s Operations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Code of Conduct on Transnational Corporations

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

  • 1170 Accesses

Abstract

Despite a number of failed attempts at creating a binding instrument governing the responsibilities of transnational corporations, the United Nations has established an open-ended intergovernmental working group (OEIWG) mandated to “elaborate an international legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises.” The OEIWG will face many questions, including those related to (1) the scope of the rights the instrument will protect; (2) the range of businesses it will govern; (3) the obligations that it will impose on states vis-à-vis transnational corporations and their related entities; (4) whether it will apply directly to transnational corporations; (5) the array of remedies that the instrument might provide to those who have been harmed by breach; and (6) the fora and form of dispute resolution recommended for enforcement. Although all 6 of the questions above are intertwined, this chapter will focus upon matters arising under questions (5) and (6). This chapter will consider and evaluate three potential enforcement options: (1) alignment between the international instrument developed by the OEIWG and domestic enforcement methods; (2) international mediation and arbitration; and (3) the creation of an international court. The chapter will also consider whether the variety of powers that the relevant enforcement body has should include powers to punish misconduct as well as compensate those harmed by misconduct.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aaronson, S. A., & Higham, I. (2013). “Re-righting business”: John Ruggie and the struggle to develop international human rights standards for transnational firms. Human Rights Quarterly, 35(2), 333–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abaclat v Argentina. (2011). ICSID Case No ARB/07/5, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Addo, M. K. (2014). The reality of the United Nations guiding principles on business and human rights. Human Rights Law Review, 14(1), 133–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • African Union. (2014). Protocol on amendments to the protocol on the statute of the African Court of justice and human rights. s.l.:s.n.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston, P. (2014). Against a world court for human rights. Ethics & International Affairs, 28(2), 197–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambach, P. (2015). A look towards the future—The ICC and ‘lessons learnt’. In C. Stahn (Ed.), The law and practice of the international criminal court (pp. 1277–1293). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amnesty International. (2016). Island of despair: Australia’s “processing” of Refugees on Nauru. London: Amnesty International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anvil Mining Ltd. c. Association canadienne contre l’impunité. (2012). QCCA 117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Broadcasting Corporation. (2005). The Kilwa Incident. [Online] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2005/s1384238.htm. Accessed November 22, 2016.

  • Baughen, S. (2015). Human rights and corporate wrongs: Closing the governance gap. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blitt, R. C. (2012). Beyond Ruggie’s guiding principles on business and human rights: Charting an embracive approach to corporate human rights compliance. Texas International Law Journal, 48(1), 33–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Border Force Act. (2015). (Cth).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassell, D., & Ramasastry, A. (2016). White paper: Options for a treaty on business and human rights. Notre Dame Journal of International and Comparative Law, 6, 1–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, J. (2008). Watchdog or paper tiger: The enforcement of human rights in international forums. University of Notre Dame Law Review, 10, 37–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Childress, D. E., III. (2015). Is an international arbitral tribunal the answer to the challenges of litigating transnational human rights in a post-Kiobel world? UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, 19, 31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clapham, A. (2014). Non-state actors. In D. Moeckli, S. Shah, S. Sivakumaran, & D. Harris (Eds.), International human rights law (pp. 531–549). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, W. M. (2012). Human rights as myth and ceremony? Reevaluating the effectiveness of human rights treaties, 1981–2007. American Journal of Sociology, 117(4), 1131–1171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, W. M. (2015). Mind the gap: State capacity and the implementation of human rights treaties. International Organization, 69(2), 405–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotula, L. (2016). Rethinking investment treaties to advance human rights. ILED Briefing, 2016(September), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronstedt, C., & Thompson, R. C. (2016). A proposal for an international arbitration tribunal on business and human rights. Harvard International Law Journal, 2016(Spring), 66–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai, X. (2013). The “compliance gap” and the efficacy of international human rights institutions. In T. Risse, S. C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance (pp. 85–102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Jonge, A. (2011). Transnational corporations and international law: Bringing TNCs out of the accountability vacuum. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 71, 66–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas-Marty, M. (2013). Ambiguities and lacunae: The international criminal court ten years on. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 11(3), 553–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doe I v Cisco Systems, Inc. (2014). 66 F Supp 3d. 1239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donoho, D. (2006). Human rights enforcement in the twenty-first century. Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 35(1), 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2015). Implementing the UN guiding principles on business and human rights—State of play. Commission Staff Working Document, Brussels: s.n.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeney, P. (2009). Business and human rights: The struggle for accountability in the un and the future direction of the advocacy agenda. Sur. Revista internacional de direitos humanos [online], 6(11), 161–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frynas, J. G., & Pegg, S. (eds). (2003). Transnational corporations and human rights. Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallegos, L., & Uribe, D. (2016). The next step against corporate impunity: A world court on business and human rights? Harvard Journal of International Law, 57(Spring), 7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannoulopoulos, D. (2016). Britain must hold fast to the European convention on human rights as it leaves the EU. [Online] Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/11/24/britain-must-hold-fast-to-the-european-convention-on-human-rights-as-it-leaves-the-eu/. Accessed December 1, 2016.

  • Giroud, S., & Moss, S. (2015). Mass claims processes under public international law. In E. Lein, D. Fairgrieve, M. O. Crespo, & V. Smith (Eds.), Collective redress in Europe: Why and how? (pp. 481–503). London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grear, A., & Weston, B. H. (2015). The betrayal of human rights and the urgency of universal corporate accountability: Reflections on a post-Kiobel lawscape. Human Rights Law Review, 15(1), 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafner-Burton, E. M., & Ron, J. (2009). Seeing double: Human rights impact through qualitative and quantitative eyes. World Politics, 61(2), 360–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillebrecht, C. (2012). The domestic mechanisms of compliance with international human rights law: Case studies from the Inter-American human rights system. Human Rights Quarterly, 34(4), 959–985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Commission of Jurists. (2016). Proposals for elements of a legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organisation of Employers; International Chamber of Commerce, Business and Industry Advisory Committee & World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2016). UN treaty process on business and human rights: Further considerations by the international business community on a way forward. [Online] Available at: https://business-humanrights.org/en/un-treaty-process-on-business-and-human-rights-further-considerations-by-the-international-business-community-on-a-way-forward. Accessed April 13, 2017.

  • JHA v Spain. (2008). CAT/C/41/D/323/2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karavias, M. (2015). Shared responsibility and multinational enterprises. Netherlands International Law Review, 62, 91–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. (2013). 133 S. Ct 1659.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knuckey, S., & Jenkin, E. (2015). Company-created remedy mechanisms for serious human rights abuses: A promising new frontier for the right to a remedy? International Journal of Human Rights, 19(6), 801–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, J., Nowak, M., & Scheinin, M. (2010). A world court of human rights: Consolidated statute and commentary. Vienna, Graz: Neuer Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyriakakis, J. (2008). Corporations and the international criminal court: The complementarity objection stripped bare. Criminal Law Forum, 19, 115–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • M68/2015 v Mins for Immigration and Border Protection. (2016). 327 ALR 369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mariniello, T. (2015). ‘One, no one and one hundred thousand’ reflections on the multiple identities of the ICC. In T. Mariniello (Ed.), The international criminal court in search of its identity and purpose (pp. 1–14). Abingdon; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, J. S. (2012). The slave trade and the origins of international human rights law. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McBeth, A. (2014). Crushed by an anvil: A case study on responsibility for human rights in the extractive sector. Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal, 11, 127–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, L. J. (2017). Extracting accountability from non-state actors in international law: Assessing the scope for direct regulation. London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Namah v Pato. (2016). [2016] PGSC 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • No Business in Abuse. (2015). Transfield’s complicity in gross human rights abuses. Sydney: No Business in Abuse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A. (2015). The international criminal court: An introduction. Cham; Heidelberg; New York; Dordrecht; London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M. (2014). The right of victims of human rights violations to a remedy: The need for a world court of human rights. Nordic Journal of Human Rights, 32(1), 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M., & Januszewski, K. M. (2015). Non-state actors and human rights. In M. Noortmann, A. Reinish, & C. Ryngaert (Eds.), Non-state actors in international law (pp. 113–161). Oxford; Portland: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of the High Commissioner, United Nations Human Rights. (2016a). State national action plans. [Online] Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/NationalActionPlans.aspx. Accessed November 16, 2016.

  • Office of the High Commissioner, United Nations Human Rights. (2016b). Improving accountability and access to remedy for victims. Brussels: Office of the High Commissioner, United Nations Human Rights.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of the High Commissioner, United Nations Human Rights. (2016c). The OHCHR accountability and remedy project: Illustrative examples for guidance to improve corporate accountability and access to judicial remedy for business-related human rights abuse. Brussels: Office of the High Commissioner, United Nations Human Rights.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxford University Faculty of Law. (2016). Results from “a public debate: ‘a world court for human rights?’”. [Online] Available at: https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-06-15-results-%E2%80%9C-public-debate-world-court-human-rights. Accessed December 1, 2016.

  • Pak, N. S., & Nussbaumer, J. P. (2009). Beyond impunity: Strengthening the legal accountability of transnational corporations for human rights abuses. s.l.: Hertie School of Governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierre v Anvil Mining Management NL. (2008). WASC 30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prihandono, I. (2011). Barriers to transnational human rights litigation against transnational corporations (TNCS): The need for cooperation between home and host countries. Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution, 3(7), 89–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramcharan, B. G. (2011). The fundamentals of international human rights treaty law. Dordrecht: BRILL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, F. (2013). Mass claims in international law. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 4(1), 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J. (2013). Just business: Multinational corporations and human rights. New York; London: WW Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J. (2014). Global governance and ‘new governance theory’: Lessons from business and human rights. Global Governance, 20(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rott, P., & Ulfbeck, V. (2015). Supply chain liability of multinational corporations? European Review of Private Law 23(3), 415–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russian Federation. (2015). Law of the Russian Federation no. 7-KFZ (CDL-REF(2016)006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarfaty, G. A. (2015). Shining a light on global supply chains. Harvard Journal of International Law 56(2), 419–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • SBS. (2014). Dateline: The inside story. [Online] Available at: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/dateline/story/inside-story. Accessed November 22, 2016.

  • Schabas, W. S. (2011). An introduction to the international criminal court (4th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, D. (2013). Enforcement and remedies. In S. Sheeran & S. N. Rodley (Eds.), Routledge handbook on international human rights law (pp. 663–681). London and New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, G., McCorquodale, R., De Schutter, O., & Lambe, A. (2013). The third pillar: Access to judicial remedies for human rights violations by transnational business. s.l.: International Corporate Accountability Roundtable, CORE and the European Coalition for Corporate Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Social Service Agency, Global Policy Forum, Geneva Infant Feeding Association, Friends of the Earth Europe and CIDSE. (2015). Written statement submitted to the human rights council open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. Geneva: United Nations, Human Rights Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strong, S. (2013). Class, mass and collective arbitration in national and international law. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Trechsel, S. (2004). A world court for human rights? Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights, 1(1), p. Art 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsakaridis, A. A. (2016). Corporate responsibility and human rights in the context of an international constitutional framework: The case of Angola. In L. Fielder & K. Topidi (Eds.), Transnational legal processes and human rights (pp. 245–265). Surrey; Burlington: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Kingdom, Border Agency. (2009). Country of origin information report: The democratic republic of Congo. London: United Kingdom Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Human Rights Council. (2007). 5/1 Institution-building of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Human Rights Council. (2014). Resolution 26/9 elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. s.l.:United Nations Human Rights Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Human Rights Council (2016). Open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. [Online] Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/WGTransCorp/Pages/IGWGOnTNC.aspx. Accessed November 17, 2016.

  • United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo. (2005). Report on the conclusions of the special investigation concerning allegations of summary executions and other human rights violations perpetrated by the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo (FARDC) in Kilwa (Katanga Province) 15 October 2004, s.l.: s.n.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations, Committee on the Rights of the Child. (2016). Concluding observations on the initial report of Nauru. Geneva: United Nations, Committee on the Rights of the Child.

    Google Scholar 

  • UR v Uruguay. (1983). UN Doc CCPRC/C/18/D/128/1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whelan, G., Moon, J., & Orlitzky, M. (2009). Human rights, transnational corporations and embedded liberalism: What chance consensus. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 367–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Court of Human Rights Development Project. (2016). The role and jurisdiction of the world court of human rights [Online] Available at: http://www.worldcourtofhumanrights.net/home. Accessed December 1, 2016.

  • World Justice Project. (2016). Rule of law index. Washington, DC: The World Justice Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zambrana-Tevar, N. (2015). Can arbitration become the preferred grievance mechanism in conflicts related to business and human rights? [Online] Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2531890 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2531890. Accessed December 2, 2016.

  • Zerk, J. (2014). Corporate liability for gross human rights abuses. Geneva: OHCHR.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia

    Vicki Waye

Authors
  1. Vicki Waye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vicki Waye .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, University of South Australia , Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Mia Mahmudur Rahim

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Waye, V. (2019). Enforcement of a Global Code of Conduct on TNC’s Operations. In: Rahim, M. (eds) Code of Conduct on Transnational Corporations. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10816-8_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation